Jammu, Jul 24: Panun Kashmir, an organisation advocating the cause of displaced Kashmiri Pandits, on Thursday rejected a bill recommended by President Droupadi Murmu on the return and rehabilitation of Kashmiri Pandits, saying it subverts the issues of “genocide” and the demand for a homeland for the community in Kashmir.
President Murmu has recommended a private member’s bill calling for the rehabilitation and resettlement of Kashmiri Pandits for consideration in the Rajya Sabha.
The Kashmiri Pandits (Recourse, Restitution, Rehabilitation and Resettlement) Bill, 2022, was introduced in the Rajya Sabha by Congress member Vivek Tankha on February 2, 2024, but required the President’s recommendation as it involves financial implications.
“We strongly reject the Kashmiri Pandits bill currently pending in the Rajya Sabha. The bill is an attempt to derail the discourse on genocide recognition and to deflect attention from the foundational demands of the displaced community of carving out a homeland for them in the Valley,” a joint statement issued by the organisation said.
The organisation’s chairman, Dr Ajay Chrungoo, Senior Vice Chairman Shailendra Aima and Vice Chairman and Head of Legal Affairs of the organisation, Prof Tito Ganju, described the bill as “politically mischievous, legally untenable, and morally hollow.”
Chrungoo said, “The so-called Kashmiri Pandits bill is not a step forward but a calibrated move to bury the issue of genocide under the garb of generic rehabilitation. This bill will not deliver justice. It will deliver finality to our displacement, make our genocide invisible in law, and erase the historical and political culpability of the forces that engineered our ethnic cleansing.”
He emphasised that Panun Kashmir has for decades sought a national law to recognise and prosecute those involved in the “genocide” of Kashmiri Hindus and to establish mechanisms for justice, memorialisation, and non-recurrence.
“We are not a welfare subject; we are a political constituency of a genocide. This bill whitewashes that truth and thus stands rejected,” Chrungoo asserted.
Shailendra Aima questioned the timing and intent behind the sudden push for this private member’s bill and said, “The government refuses to talk about genocide, yet permits the tabling of a private bill that neither names the crime nor the criminal. This is an insult to the victims, not a solution. We demand a national commitment to our homeland.”
Speaking from a constitutional and legal standpoint, Prof Ganju explained the procedural nuances of the bill and its broader implications.
“The bill has received the President’s recommendation under Article 117(3) of the Constitution, which is required for any bill involving expenditure from the Consolidated Fund of India,” he said, adding that this should not be misunderstood as an endorsement. “The recommendation merely fulfils a constitutional formality and has no bearing on the political will or legislative priority of the Union Government.”
Prof Ganju further highlighted the historical fate of private members’ bills in the Indian Parliament, noting that only a negligible fraction have ever been passed.
“Statistically, the likelihood of such a Bill being enacted is extremely low. Even if debated, its legal architecture is structurally deficient. It omits reference to genocide, criminal justice, institutional accountability, and constitutional restructuring – all of which are non-negotiables in the Panun Kashmir framework,” he said.–(PTI)
